Authoritative source of information on Psychological Operations (PSYOP) or as it is now called Military Information Support Operations (MISO). Written by a retired senior Army Officer and former Honorary Colonel of the PSYOP Regiment.

Monday, June 30, 2014

We’ve all heard the phrase “The Strategic Corporal”. We’ve
taken it to mean that a comparably junior soldier can perform an act that has a
global strategic impact. Perhaps the same can be said for Social Media.

The topic was not the importance of Social Media as a MISO
tool, but the issues of how these campaigns should be planned an implemented.
On one hand, anyone, anywhere can access and engage in social media. Many of us
are somewhat addicted to Facebook to let everyone else know what we are doing
and to vicariously experience what are friends are doing.

Access is ubiquitous. Smart phones, tablets, kiosks and, of
course, computers all are portals into social media. Does this mean that social
media operations can be run in ‘reach-back’ mode where a centralized resource
can globally execute social media MISO?

Or is it more prudent to have the forward deployed MISO CDR
orchestrate the campaign employing local and reach-back resources?

Given the far-flung and fast moving nature of actions across
the spectrum of conflict, perhaps the right answer is ‘none of the above’.
Perhaps the right answer is to develop an evolving and dynamic doctrine and set
of social media ROE that recognizes the need and resources required for social
media MISO and apportions them up and down the chain of command.

We should also recognize that there might be times where our
enemies will deny Internet access into their territory, but will actively
employ social media operations internally. For example, if ISIS should be able
to extend their control to include the ability to turn off outside world
access, it would follow that they would do this for their areas. They would
continue to provide this access for their own PSYOP as a core tenet of their
influence strategy.

Social media MISO are also indicative of the shotgun wedding
that is occurring between CNO and influence operations. The blending of these
two disciplines is accelerating so that any future operations will more than
likely require both in the assessment and execution phases.

Force providers and doctrine developers need to appreciate
this and move with haste to develop the framework for future ops – because the
future is already here.

I think it does a nice job of putting
much of the current state in the Middle East into perspective. While it doesn’t
break down the ethnic borders separating Kurds, Sunni and Shia, it shows that
Syria border’s Iraq and that Iraq serves as a buffer between Syria and Iran.

The map also shows the logical sense
behind considering the actions in Syria and Iraq as one AO.

President Obama is still mulling over
what major actions to take.

As I stated in my last post, my money
was on UAVs because they can be targeted precisely with good intelligence
(hence the recent order for deploying Special Operations). Foreign Policy noted
“Obama said – (special forces) will work alongside Iraqi military forces in
special intelligence centers, using drone video feeds and spy satellite
photographs to track and attack ISIS fighters. They'll also be in a prime
position to help carry out U.S. airstrikes the moment Obama orders them”

Where does that leave MISO?

Well – for one thing cyber influence
should be under way and likely there should be ample mobile phone targets in
the AO as well. They key question is what do you want the target to do? What is
the desired effect?

My goal would be to try and put the
enemy off their game. Not necessarily waste my time or bandwidth trying to get
them to surrender, but for them to constantly look over their shoulder for that
Predator or for more accurate fire from the Iraqi military because they have
better intelligence and more confidence.

Have we gone so far as to provide the
Iraqi force with some rudimentary MISO capabilities and training? If so, how is
it working out?

I’ll leave you with this parting
thought:

Shifting gears a bit, assuming for the
moment that the active MISO force is not starting to get stretched by new
commitments in Africa, Asia and Latin America, have we, as a community, been
smart enough to figure out how to harness the power of the Reserve MISO force
to bolster the overall capability posture?

Friday, June 13, 2014

One of my esteemed MI colleagues, a former FAA Air Marshall,
Green Beret/MI Colonel and collector of Pierce Arrow antique cars used to say “Deja
Doo Doo” which means I have seen this sh*t before.

And so it goes with Iraq. The crack Iraqi military, after
years of training, blood, sweat and treasure seems to be no better off than
they were at the start of OIF. President Obama is now in a position he doesn’t
like to be – making a quick decision that might involve military force.

Historically the President first reaches for airstrikes. The
theory is that this avoids ‘boots on the ground’ and today’s very smart weapons
can theoretically pinpoint enemy targets with great accuracy and minimal
prospects for collateral damage.

Unfortunately the decision will not be so simple this time.
My impression is that we have a roving asymmetric, insurgency like force in an
urban AO who is easily able to blend in with the population. Key will be their
ability to avoid SIGINT vulnerabilities and sufficient deception operations to
avoid UAS and smart bombs.

Where does that leave MISO?

If it were me, I’d pick some specific targets, annihilate
the crap out of them and then mount a ‘you can run, but you cannot hide’
campaign. While I’m clearly not on the ground, it seems to me that the fighters
in Iraq are seasoned WRT to the Syrian theater. The use of overwhelming high
tech American weaponry may be enough to motivate them to retreat across the
border.

This may also be a time to leverage mobile phone MISO, EW
and other technological means that would disrupt the enemy’s chain of command.

Wednesday, June 4, 2014

Yesterday, 2 June 2014 was a Gubernatorial Primary here in
California. For reasons that I don’t quite remember, I decided to be an
election volunteer. I was designed as a Substitute Clerk and was assigned to a
small precinct co-located in a church with another precinct.

The polls were open from 0600 to 2000. During that time we
processed a grand total of 57 live voters. All used two page ballots each about
11” by 17” long. Not one person (even in Silicon Valley) used the voter
machine. We also collected over 100 absentee ballots.

The whole experience harkened me back to Sarajevo in 1997
when the Combined Joint Information Campaign Task Force (CJICTF) had to
re-print ballots for Bosnian election because the local contract printer had
printed the ballots just as the samples looked. Meaning each line had a
placeholder like “AAAAA” or “BBBBB” rather than the actual candidate names.

In reflecting on the two elections and recent events in
Afghanistan, I thought it appropriate to offer some observations from an
organizational perspective.

First – a bit about my day yesterday.

Starting at the bottom.

Clerks and a Precinct Inspector (PI) are the two levels of
individuals at a polling place. The PI reports to a Field Inspector (FI) who
manages between 8 and 12 precincts. All of these people are volunteers. Clerks
are paid $95 for their service and inspectors receive stipends of $150 to $180.
If you’re interested you can check out: http://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/Volunteer/Pages/Officer.aspx)

The polls are totally manned by volunteers. Judging from my
personal experience, there are no qualifications or test to be the PI. This is
a big mistake, as you’ll see as I continue on.

I was a Substitute Clerk. I took a 3 hour Election Training
Class which was well done because it was mostly hands on. The Election
Officer’s Manual (in my photo) is very much by the numbers and easy to follow.

Assigned Clerks and PIs report to their polling places on
Monday night at a designated time to set up the polls. Controlled items such as
the ballots, official forms and voting machines are not set up at this point
and are still secured until Election Day Morning. These teams report to their
polling places at 0600 on election day.

All substitutes report to the Registrar of Voters (ROV)
office at 0600 on Election Day.It took
the ROV over 3 hours to get me an assignment and there had to be over 100
people still to be assigned when I left at about 0905.

My precinct had 1 PI who was in her first election. Her line
of work was that she was a home health aide. She couldn’t even figure out how
to work the official precinct cell phone. There were two other works with 5 years
or more experience, one other new guy and me.

The day went by slowly but we were able to process all 57
voters without incident. Close-up was a bit of a fire drill. All of the forms,
machines and supplies came in either cases or bags or cases. Each container had
a label indicating what went where. Some had to be sealed, others did not.

The two experienced workers counted the ballots and filled
out the forms related to that paperwork. The other guy and I tallied and shut
down the voter machine, which we then packed. We also dismantled the polling
booths/tables. In all it took about an hour and 20 minutes to pack things up.

The PI took a two-hour lunch without apology while the
workers only got an hour. She was also overwhelmed by the sheer mass of
materials and the multiple steps involved in closing the polls. She essentially
stood by bewildered while the rest of us did the work.

I loaded the PI’s car with the ballots, cartridge from the
voting machine and other controlled items that had to be returned. IAW protocol
followed her car with the ballots to the drop off point where ROV people would
unload the car.

Here are my thoughts as far as MISO operations. These are some
key things that MISO personnel need to bear in mind:

1.Impressions are everything. Elections and the
people running them have to come across as competent, transparent and honest.

2.Polling places must be run in a consistent and
nonpartisan manner. Polling station managers must be able to work with other
people of all kinds and have the management skills to orchestrate the
logistical issues with trust and aplomb.

3.Polls are open and must be secure.

4.Observers or poll watchers are allowed to
observe and observe. In the case of the State of California there is a Roster
Index which shows who has voted. The purpose would appear to be to allow poll
watchers to call those who have not voted and encouraging them to vote for
their candidate.

5.There may also be Election Observers who are
from nongovernmental or community based agencies who are there to observe that
the election process is running IAW State and Federal Laws.

6.Observers and watchers are not allowed to
interfere with the election process, permanently remove any posted Indexes,
handle any ballots or act as replacements for the Election Officers (Clerks and
PI).

7.Languages are key. Ballots and instructions need
to be clear and that they need to take into account the languages of the
population. We had ballots in English, Spanish, Tagalog, Chinese and
Vietnamese. Next year California will add Hindi, Khmer, Korean and Japanese.

8.Processing can be cumbersome as long as it is
easy to follow, transparent and embodies multiple checks and balances.

9.Ballots must be printed in plenty of time before
the election so that any issues can be dealt with prior to Election Day.

10.Chain
of custody and security of ballots as well as the sanctity of the election
process must be maintained at all times.

11.The
counting and reporting function must also be similarly transparent, trusted and
reliable as well.

Hopefully this will provide some useful perspective and
since nothing ever goes away on the Internet – it will always be there if you
need it.

Sunday, June 1, 2014

OK, so I had a bit of writer’s block this week and my
on-line teaching kept me busier than normal, so I didn’t make this week’s post
on time.

I’m on a variety of lists and sometimes I reflect on their
relationship to PSYOP. Of course, I’m one of those heretics that believes PSYOP
is a form of marketing and sales – not the same as selling toothpaste and
iPads, but related nevertheless.

The page at the right is from www.whitehouse.gov.
I recognize that Tuesday’s (3 June 14) elections are pretty much small potatoes
and the Secretary Clinton is about to embark on a book tour which many regard
as ‘coming attractions’ to her likely presidential campaign. I’m also aware the
President Obama is in the last laps of his presidency and his thoughts are
likely turning to life after the White House.

Nevertheless the graphic is worth a closer look for its
influence value, not necessarily its content.

From an influence
perspective – simple easy to read graphics are good tools. By carefully
designing the graphic and the scale you can pretty much get the graph to say
virtually anything you would like the reader to infer.

This one is a
particularly good example of that technique. All of us in the Community know
there is more to the ‘war’ in Afghanistan that the number of boots on the
ground. Even if the numbers are accurate, there is certainly more to the story
and to interpreting whether or not this particular ‘promise’ has been kept.